Valid issuance of tax notices under Section 148 requires only that they are issued within limitation, regardless of subsequent service errors.

JUDGMENT :

DINESH MEHTA, J.

1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 30.12.2025, whereby the respondents have rejected the petitioner’s objection regarding the jurisdiction and has decided to continue with the reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. Before adverting to the issues that arise for consideration, it will be apposite to give, in brief, the factual backdrop giving rise to the present case. 3. The petitioner is an assessee regularly filing his return of income in Delhi and is assessed to tax within the jurisdiction of the respondents. For Assessment Year 2012-13, the petitioner filed his return of income on 26.09.2012 declaring an income of Rs. 9,39,990/-.

4. On 31.03.2019, at 11:07 pm, an e-mail was sent to the petitioner’s registered mail id from the office of the Assessing Officer, which was viewed by him on 01.04.2019. The document annexed thereto however bore the name and PAN of some other assessee, namely, M/s Paramsant Global Infratech Ltd.

5. The petitioner addressed an e-mail dated 18.04.2019 to the respondents stating that the notice received by him pertained to a third party. Thereafter, on 05.09.2019, on petitioner’s request the respondents forwarded the reasons for reopening the assessment. The petitioner raised objections vide e-mail of even date against the initiation of proceedings, on the ground that no valid notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act of 1961‟) had been issued or served upon him within the period of limitation.

6. Notwithstanding the above referred objections, a notice dated 18.10.2019 under Section 142 (1) of the Act of 1961 came to be issued and, between 24.10.2019 and 10.12.2019, the objections were dealt with by a series of communications.

7. An assessment order dated 12.12.2019 was thereafter passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act of 1961, making an addition of Rs. 13,00,000/- and assessing the total income at Rs. 22,39,990/-. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal and, by order dated 12.12.2024, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) set aside the assessment order and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the petitioner’s contention regarding the validity of the notice. Pursuant thereto, a notice dated 16.09.2025 under Section 142 (1) of the Act of 1961 was issued.

8. Thereafter by way of the impugned order dated 30.12.2025, the respondents rejected the said objections and directed continuation of the reassessment proceedings which has been impugned before us.

9. Mr. Manuj Sabharwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submitted that though a notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 was issued and uploaded on the e-filing portal on 31.03.2019, no automatic e- mail was triggered through the ITBA portal, instead, on the very same day, the Assessing Officer manually sent an e-mail enclosing a notice which was relating to an entirely different assessee, namely, M/s Paramsant Global Infratech Ltd. and it bore some other PAN number.

10. He contended that such a notice cannot constitute valid issuance or service of notice under Section 148 of the Act of 1961 in terms of Section 282 read with Rule 127 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. In support of his aforesaid contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this Court rendered in the case ofSuman Jeet Agarwal v. ITO, reported in [2022] 143 taxmann.com 11/290 Taxman 493/449 ITR 517 (Delhi), and submitted that mere uploading of a notice on the ITBA portal does not amount to valid issuance unde